We performed a comparison between Cisco SD-WAN and FatPipe SD-WAN based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Fortinet, Check Point Software Technologies and others in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions."The first part that we like is that we can reuse certain hardware, which is a valuable asset. You can use hardware SKUs that already exist in the network. The second part that we like is the integration with the cloud and the measurement of the cloud's quality. These are the two values that this solution gives as compared to other implementations that we have seen."
"Cisco SD-WAN's collaborative features are unique and sustainable. I also like the protocols, which use two SD-WAN."
"The solution is stable and reliable."
"The most valuable feature is the application-level routing."
"If I have to give a neutral view of all the SD-WAN platforms that I have known so far, Cisco is good in routing."
"The tool is stable, and its troubleshooting capabilities are good. It helps us identify and fix any issues. It simplifies VPN setup for both side-to-side and multisite connections. This allows for easier data sharing between main and branch offices, creating a local network feel even for distant sites."
"The most valuable features are zero-disk provisioning and link load balancing on an application basis."
"The technical support is very responsive."
"The most valuable feature of FatPipe SD-WAN is it's based on SD-WAN technology."
"The solution could be more secure. Security is always a priority for us."
"The user interface needs improvement. Users should be able to find various features faster without much tweaking."
"There should be more security features in the hybrid and on-premise deployments of Cisco SD-WAN. The cloud has most of the security features."
"The initial setup was not very straightforward, but it gets easier the more deployments you complete."
"Compresson deduplication should be added."
"Cisco SD-WAN is not as easy to deploy as the Meraki and FortiGate solutions. The zero-touch deployment could be a lot better. The deployment and initial setup are complicated and could be better."
"Simplifying the definition and implementation could add significant value, as it can be complex due to multiple product integrations and customization requirements."
"I would like to see features related to security compliance, including a view of compliance with standards. With this, I should be able to do an audit of my network with SDWAN."
"FatPipe SD-WAN can improve the price to scale the solution."
Cisco SD-WAN is ranked 1st in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions with 86 reviews while FatPipe SD-WAN is ranked 16th in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions with 1 review. Cisco SD-WAN is rated 8.0, while FatPipe SD-WAN is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco SD-WAN writes "A solution for integrating services to enhance up-time, performance and lower costs". On the other hand, the top reviewer of FatPipe SD-WAN writes "Beneficial technology, reliable, and simple deployment". Cisco SD-WAN is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Meraki SD-WAN, VMware SD-WAN, Juniper Session Smart Router and Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform, whereas FatPipe SD-WAN is most compared with VMware SD-WAN and Fortinet FortiGate.
See our list of best Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions vendors and best WAN Edge vendors.
We monitor all Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.